R.L. Turner Corp. v. Wressell
Decision Date | 16 September 2015 |
Docket Number | No. 06A05–1411–PL–540.,06A05–1411–PL–540. |
Citation | 44 N.E.3d 26 |
Parties | R.L. TURNER CORPORATION, Appellant–Defendant, v. William WRESSELL, Appellee–Plaintiff. |
Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
Michael L. Einterz, Jr., Einterz & Einterz, Zionsville, IN, Attorney for Appellant.
Robert S. Rifkin, Maurer Rifkin, P.C., Carmel, IN, Attorney for Appellee.
[1] Appellee–Plaintiff William Wressell brought a claim against his employer Appellant–Defendant R.L. Turner Corporation (“RLTC”) alleging that he did not receive wages he was entitled to under the Indiana Common Construction Wage Act (“CCWA”). The trial court found that RLTC provided insufficient fringe benefits to meet the minimum wage requirements of the CCWA and awarded Wressell compensatory damages for the unpaid fringe benefits as well as statutory treble damages. The trial court also awarded attorney's fees to Wressell pursuant to the fee shifting provision of the Indiana Wage Payment Statute.
[2] On appeal, RLTC raises several issues which we consolidate and restate as follows: (1) whether the CCWA can form the basis for a private cause of action; (2) whether the trial court erred in finding that RLTC provided insufficient fringe benefits to meet the minimum requirements of the CCWA; and (3) whether the trial court erred in awarding attorney's fees to Wressell. Wressell argues on appeal that the trial court erred in failing to consider his overtime hours in calculating the amount of wages he was entitled to. We affirm the judgment of the trial court; however, we remand with instructions that the trial court award Wressell additional damages for overtime compensation.
[3] Wressell filed a claim against RLTC on January 5, 2012 for unpaid wages. (App. 20–23) In December of 2012, the trial court granted a motion for summary judgment in favor of RLTC. That decision was reversed by this court on appeal in Wressell v. R.L. Turner Corporation, 988 N.E.2d 289 (Ind.Ct.App.2013), trans. denied. We have previously outlined the facts of this case, the relevant portions of which are as follows:
Wressell, 988 N.E.2d at 292–96 (footnotes omitted).1
[4] The trial court granted RLTC's June 29, 2012 motion for summary judgment. On appeal, we...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
River Ridge Dev. Auth. v. Outfront Media, LLC
...involved; the time limitations imposed by the circumstances; and the result achieved in the litigation." R.L. Turner Corp. v. Wressell , 44 N.E.3d 26, 39 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). Because we conclude that the trial court erred by awarding attorney fees here, we do not reach the issue of whether......
- Bradley v. State
-
Willis v. Dilden Bros., Inc.
...damages does not dictate the amount of reasonableness attorney's fees when a fee shifting statute is applied. SeeR.L. Turner Corp. v. Wressell , 44 N.E.3d 26 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (affirming attorney fee award of $99,870.00 to secure compensatory damages of $3,852.82 under the CCWA)[, trans.......
-
Columbus Regional Hospital v. Clark
...42 (Ind.Ct.App. 2015). Hospital's silence results in a lower standard of review-that is, prima facie error-as to the unchallenged issue. See id. Clark's waiver and Hospital's silence notwithstanding, we find Hospital sufficiently preserved its challenge to Dr. Prystowsky's letter. At the he......